Efficacy of Vaccine Protection Against COVID-19 Virus Infection in Patients with Chronic Liver Diseases.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 is a useful weapon to combat the virus. Patients with chronic liver diseases (CLDs), including compensated or decompensated liver cirrhosis and noncirrhotic diseases, have a decreased immunologic response to coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines. At the same time, they have increased mortality if infected. Current data show a reduction in mortality when patients with chronic liver diseases are vaccinated. A suboptimal vaccine response has been observed in liver transplant recipients, especially those receiving immunosuppressive therapy, so an early booster dose is recommended to achieve a better protective effect. Currently, there are no clinical data comparing the protective efficacy of different vaccines in patients with chronic liver diseases. Patient preference, availability of the vaccine in the country or area, and adverse effect profiles are factors to consider when choosing a vaccine. There have been reports of immune-mediated hepatitis after coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, and clinicians should be aware of that potential side effect. Most patients who developed hepatitis after vaccination responded well to treatment with prednisolone, but an alternative type of vaccine should be considered for subsequent booster doses. Further prospective studies are required to investigate the duration of immunity and protection against different viral variants in patients with chronic liver diseases or liver transplant recipients, as well as the effect of heterologous vaccination.

Third Asia-Pacific consensus recommendations on colorectal cancer screening and postpolypectomy surveillance.

The Asia-Pacific region has the largest number of cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) and one of the highest levels of mortality due to this condition in the world. Since the publishing of two consensus recommendations in 2008 and 2015, significant advancements have been made in our knowledge of epidemiology, pathology and the natural history of the adenoma-carcinoma progression. Based on the most updated epidemiological and clinical studies in this region, considering literature from international studies, and adopting the modified Delphi process, the Asia-Pacific Working Group on Colorectal Cancer Screening has updated and revised their recommendations on (1) screening methods and preferred strategies; (2) age for starting and terminating screening for CRC; (3) screening for individuals with a family history of CRC or advanced adenoma; (4) surveillance for those with adenomas; (5) screening and surveillance for sessile serrated lesions and (6) quality assurance of screening programmes. Thirteen countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region were represented in this exercise. International advisors from North America and Europe were invited to participate.

SARS-CoV-2 targets the lysosome to mediate airway inflammatory cell death.

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to wreak havoc, researchers around the globe are working together to understand how the responsible agent - severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) damages the respiratory system and other organs. Macroautophagy/autophagy is an innate immune response against viral infection and is known to be manipulated by positive-strand RNA viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. Nevertheless, the link between autophagic subversion and cell death or inflammation in COVID-19 remains unclear. Emerging evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2 could trigger pyroptosis, a form of inflammatory programmed cell death characterized by the activation of inflammasomes and CASP1 (caspase 1) and the formation of transmembrane pores by GSDMD (gasdermin D). In this connection, autophagic flux impairment is a known activator of inflammasomes. This prompted us to investigate if SARS-CoV-2 could target autophagy to induce inflammasome-dependent pyroptosis in lung epithelial cells.Abbreviations: ATP6AP1: ATPase H+ transporting accessory protein 1; CASP1: caspase 1; COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019; GSDMD: gasdermin D; IL1B: interleukin 1 beta; IL18: interleukin 18; KRT 18: keratin 18; NLRP3: NLR family pyrin domain containing 3; NOD: nucleotide oligomerization domain; NSP6: non-structural protein 6; TFEB: transcription factor EB; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

SARS-CoV-2 non-structural protein 6 triggers NLRP3-dependent pyroptosis by targeting ATP6AP1.

A recent mutation analysis suggested that Non-Structural Protein 6 (NSP6) of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a key determinant of the viral pathogenicity. Here, by transcriptome analysis, we demonstrated that the inflammasome-related NOD-like receptor signaling was activated in SARS-CoV-2-infected lung epithelial cells and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients' lung tissues. The induction of inflammasomes/pyroptosis in patients with severe COVID-19 was confirmed by serological markers. Overexpression of NSP6 triggered NLRP3/ASC-dependent caspase-1 activation, interleukin-1ß/18 maturation, and pyroptosis of lung epithelial cells. Upstream, NSP6 impaired lysosome acidification to inhibit autophagic flux, whose restoration by 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, metformin or polydatin abrogated NSP6-induced pyroptosis. NSP6 directly interacted with ATP6AP1, a vacuolar ATPase proton pump component, and inhibited its cleavage-mediated activation. L37F NSP6 variant, which was associated with asymptomatic COVID-19, exhibited reduced binding to ATP6AP1 and weakened ability to impair lysosome acidification to induce pyroptosis. Consistently, infection of cultured lung epithelial cells with live SARS-CoV-2 resulted in autophagic flux stagnation, inflammasome activation, and pyroptosis. Overall, this work supports that NSP6 of SARS-CoV-2 could induce inflammatory cell death in lung epithelial cells, through which pharmacological rectification of autophagic flux might be therapeutically exploited.

Lysosome activation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and prognostic significance of circulating LC3B in COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly worldwide, causing significant mortality. There is a mechanistic relationship between intracellular coronavirus replication and deregulated autophagosome-lysosome system. We performed transcriptome analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from COVID-19 patients and identified the aberrant upregulation of genes in the lysosome pathway. We further determined the capability of two circulating markers, namely microtubule-associated proteins 1A/1B light chain 3B (LC3B) and (p62/SQSTM1) p62, both of which depend on lysosome for degradation, in predicting the emergence of moderate-to-severe disease in COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization for supplemental oxygen therapy. Logistic regression analyses showed that LC3B was associated with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, independent of age, sex and clinical risk score. A decrease in LC3B concentration <5.5 ng/ml increased the risk of oxygen and ventilatory requirement (adjusted odds ratio: 4.6; 95% CI: 1.1-22.0; P = 0.04). Serum concentrations of p62 in the moderate-to-severe group were significantly lower in patients aged 50 or below. In conclusion, lysosome function is deregulated in PBMCs isolated from COVID-19 patients, and the related biomarker LC3B may serve as a novel tool for stratifying patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 from those with asymptomatic or mild disease. COVID-19 patients with a decrease in LC3B concentration <5.5 ng/ml will require early hospital admission for supplemental oxygen therapy and other respiratory support.

Association between well-being and compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures by healthcare professionals: A cross-sectional study.

IMPORTANCE: Knowledge and attitude influence compliance and individuals' practices. The risk and protective factors associated with high compliance to these preventive measures are critical to enhancing pandemic preparedness. OBJECTIVE: This survey aims to assess differences in mental health, knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of preventive measures for COVID-19 amongst healthcare professionals (HCP) and non-healthcare professionals. DESIGN: Multi-national cross-sectional study was carried out using electronic surveys between May-June 2020. SETTING: Multi-national survey was distributed across 36 countries through social media, word-of-mouth, and electronic mail. PARTICIPANTS: Participants ≥21 years working in healthcare and non-healthcare related professions. MAIN OUTCOME: Risk factors determining the difference in KAP towards personal hygiene and social distancing measures during COVID-19 amongst HCP and non-HCP. RESULTS: HCP were significantly more knowledgeable on personal hygiene (AdjOR 1.45, 95% CI -1.14 to 1.83) and social distancing (AdjOR 1.31, 95% CI -1.06 to 1.61) compared to non-HCP. They were more likely to have a positive attitude towards personal hygiene and 1.5 times more willing to participate in the contact tracing app. There was high compliance towards personal hygiene and social distancing measures amongst HCP. HCP with high compliance were 1.8 times more likely to flourish and more likely to have a high sense of emotional (AdjOR 1.94, 95% CI (1.44 to 2.61), social (AdjOR 2.07, 95% CI -1.55 to 2.78), and psychological (AdjOR 2.13, 95% CI (1.59-2.85) well-being. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: While healthcare professionals were more knowledgeable, had more positive attitudes, their higher sense of total well-being was seen to be more critical to enhance compliance. Therefore, focusing on the well-being of the general population would help to enhance their compliance towards the preventive measures for COVID-19.

Bioinformatic analyses hinted at augmented T helper 17 cell differentiation and cytokine response as the central mechanism of COVID‐19–associated Guillain‐Barré syndrome

ObjectivesGuillain‐Barré syndrome (GBS) results from autoimmune attack on the peripheral nerves, causing sensory, motor and autonomic abnormalities. Emerging evidence suggests that there might be an association between COVID‐19 and GBS. Nevertheless, the underlying pathophysiological mechanism remains unclear.Materials and MethodsWe performed bioinformatic analyses to delineate the potential genetic crosstalk between COVID‐19 and GBS.ResultsCOVID‐19 and GBS were associated with a similar subset of immune/inflammation regulatory genes, including TNF, CSF2, IL2RA, IL1B, IL4, IL6 and IL10. Protein‐protein interaction network analysis revealed that the combined gene set showed an increased connectivity as compared to COVID‐19 or GBS alone, particularly the potentiated interactions with CD86, IL23A, IL27, ISG20, PTGS2, HLA‐DRB1, HLA‐DQB1 and ITGAM, and these genes are related to Th17 cell differentiation. Transcriptome analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from patients with COVID‐19 and GBS further demonstrated the activation of interleukin‐17 signalling in both conditions.ConclusionsAugmented Th17 cell differentiation and cytokine response was identified in both COVID‐19 and GBS. PBMC transcriptome analysis also suggested the pivotal involvement of Th17 signalling pathway. In conclusion, our data suggested aberrant Th17 cell differentiation as a possible mechanism by which COVID‐19 can increase the risk of GBS.

Mass Screening Is Associated with Low Rates of Acute Kidney Injury among COVID-19 Patients in Hong Kong.

INTRODUCTION: Renal involvement in COVID-19 is less well characterized in settings with vigilant public health surveillance, including mass screening and early hospitalization. We assessed kidney complications among COVID-19 patients in Hong Kong, including the association with risk factors, length of hospitalization, critical presentation, and mortality. METHODS: Linked electronic records of all patients with confirmed COVID-19 from 5 major designated hospitals were extracted. Duplicated records due to interhospital transferal were removed. Primary outcome was the incidence of in-hospital acute kidney injury (AKI). Secondary outcomes were AKI-associated mortality, incident renal replacement therapy (RRT), intensive care admission, prolonged hospitalization and disease course (defined as >90th percentile of hospitalization duration [35 days] and duration from symptom onset to discharge [43 days], respectively), and change of estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Patients were further stratified into being symptomatic or asymptomatic. RESULTS: Patients were characterized by young age (median: 38.4, IQR: 28.4-55.8 years) and short time (median: 5, IQR: 2-9 days) from symptom onset to admission. Among the 591 patients, 22 (3.72%) developed AKI and 4 (0.68%) required RRT. The median time from symptom onset to in-hospital AKI was 15 days. AKI increased the odds of prolonged hospitalization and disease course by 2.0- and 3.5-folds, respectively. Estimated GFR 24 weeks post-discharge reduced by 7.51 and 1.06 mL/min/1.73 m2 versus baseline (upon admission) in the AKI and non-AKI groups, respectively. The incidence of AKI was comparable between asymptomatic (4.8%, n = 3/62) and symptomatic (3.7%, n = 19/519) patients. CONCLUSION: The overall rate of AKI among COVID-19 patients in Hong Kong is low, which could be attributable to a vigilant screening program and early hospitalization. Among patients who developed in-hospital AKI, the duration of hospitalization is prolonged and kidney function impairment can persist for up to 6 months post-discharge. Mass surveillance for COVID-19 is warranted in identifying asymptomatic subjects for earlier AKI management.

Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 1 and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 During Aerosol-Generating Procedures in Critical Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk of coronavirus transmission to healthcare workers performing aerosol-generating procedures and the potential benefits of personal protective equipment during these procedures. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched using a combination of related MeSH terms and keywords. STUDY SELECTION: Cohort studies and case controls investigating common anesthetic and critical care aerosol-generating procedures and transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to healthcare workers were included for quantitative analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative and quantitative data on the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus to healthcare workers via aerosol-generating procedures in anesthesia and critical care were collected independently. The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions tool was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventeen studies out of 2,676 yielded records were included for meta-analyses. Endotracheal intubation (odds ratio, 6.69, 95% CI, 3.81-11.72; p < 0.001), noninvasive ventilation (odds ratio, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.86-7.19; p < 0.001), and administration of nebulized medications (odds ratio, 10.03; 95% CI, 1.98-50.69; p = 0.005) were found to increase the odds of healthcare workers contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The use of N95 masks (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03-0.39; p < 0.001), gowns (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.73; p < 0.001), and gloves (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.29-0.53; p < 0.001) were found to be significantly protective of healthcare workers from contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. CONCLUSIONS: Specific aerosol-generating procedures are high risk for the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 from patients to healthcare workers. Personal protective equipment reduce the odds of contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on irritable bowel syndrome.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Gastrointestinal manifestations of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may mimic irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and social distancing measures may affect IBS patients negatively. We aimed to study the impact of COVID-19 on respondents with self-reported IBS. METHODS: We conducted an anonymized survey from May to June 2020 in 33 countries. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices on personal hygiene and social distancing as well as psychological impact of COVID-19 were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed to determine differences in well-being and compliance to social distancing measures between respondents with and without self-reported IBS. Factors associated with improvement or worsening of IBS symptoms were evaluated. RESULTS: Out of 2704 respondents, 2024 (74.9%) did not have IBS, 305 (11.3%) had self-reported IBS, and 374 (13.8%) did not know what IBS was. Self-reported IBS respondents reported significantly worse emotional, social, and psychological well-being compared with non-IBS respondents and were less compliant to social distancing measures (28.2% vs 35.3%, P = 0.029); 61.6% reported no change, 26.6% reported improvement, and 11.8% reported worsening IBS symptoms. Higher proportion of respondents with no change in IBS symptoms were willing to practice social distancing indefinitely versus those who deteriorated (74.9% vs 51.4%, P = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, willingness to continue social distancing for another 2-3 weeks (vs longer period) was significantly associated with higher odds of worsening IBS. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that self-reported IBS respondents had worse well-being and compliance to social distancing measures than non-IBS respondents. Future research will focus on occupational stress and dietary changes during COVID-19 that may influence IBS.

The potential effectiveness of the WHO International Health Regulations capacity requirements on control of the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study of 114 countries.

OBJECTIVES: We examined if the WHO International Health Regulations (IHR) capacities were associated with better COVID-19 pandemic control. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Population-based study of 114 countries. PARTICIPANTS: General population. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each country, we extracted: (1) the maximum rate of COVID-19 incidence increase per 100,000 population over any 5-day moving average period since the first 100 confirmed cases; (2) the maximum 14-day cumulative incidence rate since the first case; (3) the incidence and mortality within 30 days since the first case and first COVID-19-related death, respectively. We retrieved the 13 country-specific International Health Regulations capacities and constructed linear regression models to examine whether these capacities were associated with COVID-19 incidence and mortality, controlling for the Human Development Index, Gross Domestic Product, the population density, the Global Health Security index, prior exposure to SARS/MERS and Stringency Index. RESULTS: Countries with higher International Health Regulations score were significantly more likely to have lower incidence (ß coefficient -24, 95% CI -35 to -13) and mortality (ß coefficient -1.7, 95% CI -2.5 to -1.0) per 100,000 population within 30 days since the first COVID-19 diagnosis. A similar association was found for the other incidence outcomes. Analysis using different regression models controlling for various confounders showed a similarly significant association. CONCLUSIONS: The International Health Regulations score was significantly associated with reduction in rate of incidence and mortality of COVID-19. These findings inform design of pandemic control strategies, and validated the International Health Regulations capacities as important metrics for countries that warrant evaluation and improvement of their health security capabilities.

IDDF2020-ABS-0205 The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on irritable bowel syndrome

IDDF2020-ABS-0205 Table 1Comparison of demographic variables between respondents with and without IBS Non-IBS (n = 2024) IBS (n = 305) p Age 39.7 ± 12.9 40.1 ± 13.0 1.0 Gender 0.6 Male 727 (35.9) 119 (39.0) Female 1297 (64.1) 186 (61.0) Race 0.2 Bengali 31 (1.5) 2 (0.7) Caucasian 24 (1.2) 6 (2.0) Chinese 1148 (56.7) 188 (61.6) Filipino 45 (2.2) 2 (0.7) Indian 154 (7.6) 20 (6.6) Japanese 5 (0.2) 0 (0.0) Korean 131 (6.5) 28 (9.2) Malay 328 (16.2) 39 (12.8) Others 158 (7.8) 20 (6.6) Economic region 0.3 High 1156 (57.1) 183 (60.0) Upper-middle 457 (22.6) 74 (24.3) Middle/Low 411 (20.3) 48 (15.7) What is your highest education level? 0.8 No formal education/Primary school 9 (0.4) 0 (0.0) Secondary school 164 (8.1) 29 (9.5) Pre-university 258 (12.7) 44 (14.4) Tertiary – undergraduate/postgraduate degree 1593 (78.7) 232 (76.1) Employment 0.4 Full-time 1497 (74.0) 213 (69.8) Part-time 125 (6.2) 18 (5.9) Not working 402 (19.9) 74 (24.3) Housing 1.0 Dormitory 61 (3.0) 13 (4.3) Government housing with 2 or 3 rooms 306 (15.1) 37 (12.1) Government housing with more than 3 rooms 376 (18.6) 62 (20.3) Private apartment or condominium 601 (29.7) 89 (29.2) Private landed property 680 (33.6) 104 (34.1) Annual household Income per capita in USD (total household income/number of people in the household) 1.0 Less than $1000 259 (12.8) 37 (12.1) $1000 - $2000 274 (13.5) 46 (15.1) $2000 - $4000 375 (18.5) 49 (16.1) $4000 - $6000 211 (10.4) 29 (9.5) $6000 - $8000 138 (6.8) 24 (7.9) $8000 - $10000 173 (8.5) 23 (7.5) More than $10000 594 (29.3) 97 (31.8) Have you been diagnosed with COVID-19? 1.0 Yes 32 (1.6) 4 (1.3) No 1992 (98.4) 301 (98.7) Compliance 0.029 Yes 715 (35.3) 86 (28.2) No 1309 (64.7) 219 (71.8) Not flourishing 1025 (50.6) 207 (67.9) <0.01 Flourishing 999 (49.4) 98 (32.1) Well-being total scores 45.8 ± 14.6 40.5 ± 14.8 <0.01 Emotional well-being 10.3 ± 3.5 9.4 ± 3.6 <0.01 Social well-being 15.0 ± 6.1 12.8 ± 6.1 <0.01 Psychological well-being 20.4 ± 6.6 18.3 ± 6.7 <0.01 Abstract IDDF2020-ABS-0205 Table 2Comparison of demographic variables between respondents who reported no change and worsening in severity of IBSQuestion No change (n = 183) Worsen (n = 35) p Age 38.8 ± 12.2 40.1 ± 14.3 1.0 Gender 1.0 Male 71 (38.8) 14 (40.0) Female 112 (61.2) 21 (60.0) Economic region 0.1 High 110 (60.1) 28 (80.0) Upper-middle 44 (24.0) 6 (17.1) Middle/Low 29 (15.8) 1 (2.9) What is your highest education level? 1.0 Secondary school 18 (9.8) 4 (11.4) Pre-university 22 (12.0) 5 (14.3) Tertiary – undergraduate/postgraduate degree 143 (78.1) 26 (74.3) Employment 0.2 Full-time 132 (72.1) 26 (74.3) Part-time 7 (3.8) 4 (11.4) Not working 44 (24.0) 5 (14.3) Work from home 1.0 Yes 45 (32.1) 8 (26.7) No 95 (67.9) 22 (73.3) Compliance 1.0 Yes 54 (29.5) 10 (28.6) No 129 (70.5) 25 (71.4) Which of the following would you consider as main reason for compliance with social distancing measures? 0.034 Fear of getting COVID 19 90 (49.2) 11 (31.4) Fear of family members getting COVID 19 86 (47.0) 19 (54.3) Fear of fines/punitive measures 7 (3.8) 5 (14.3) Would you willingly participate in the contact tracing app? 1.0 Yes 143 (78.1) 27 (77.1) No 40 (21.9) 8 (22.9) For how long are you willing to practice social distancing behaviour to keep yourself and others safe? 0.016 As long as it takes 137 (74.9) 18 (51.4) For another 2–3 weeks 4 (2.2) 4 (11.4) For another 1 month 12 (6.6) 6 (17.1) For another 3 months 14 (7.7) 5 (14.3) For another 6 months 13 (7.1) 1 (2.9) I want social distancing to stop now 3 (1.6) 1 (2.9) Flourishing <0.01 Yes 64 (35.0) 3 (8.6) No 119 (65.0) 32 (91.4) Well-being total scores 40.5 ± 15.0 35.4 ± 13.3 0.1 Emotional well-being 9.5 ± 3.5 7.7 ± 3.6 0.014 Social well-being 12.7 ± 6.3 11.7 ± 4.7 0.8 Psychological well-being 18.3 ± 6.9 15.9 ± 6.5 0.1 Abstract IDDF2020-ABS-0205 Table 3Univariable and multivariable regression of factors associated with worsening in severity of IBS (with no change in severity of IBS group as reference)Question OR (95% CI) p AdjOR(95%CI) p Do you wash your hands before and after handing food?* Never (ref) 1.00 - - Seldom 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - 50% of the time 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - Most of the time 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - Always 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - Do you cover your mouth when you sneeze or cough?* Never (ref) 1.00 - - Seldom 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - 50% of the time 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - Most of the time 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - Always 0.0 (0.0) 1.0 - - Which of the following would you consider as main reason for compliance with social distancing measures? Fear of getting COVID 19 (ref) 1.00 1.00 Fear of family members getting COVID 19 1.8 (0.8 – 4.0) 0.1 2.0 (0.9 – 4.7) 0.1 Fear of fines/punitive measures 5.8 (1.6 – 21.6) <0.01 5.9 (1.4 – 25.6) 0.017 For how long are you willing to practice social distancing behaviour to keep yourself and others safe? As long as it takes (ref) 1.00 1.00 For another 2–3 weeks 7.6 (1.7 – 33.1) <0.01 6.0 (1.2 – 28.8) 0.026 For another 1 month 3.8 (1.3 – 11.4) 0.017 2.9 (0.9 – 9.0) 0.1 For another 3 months 2.7 (0.9 – 8.4) 0.1 3.1 (0.9 – 10.2) 0.1 For another 6 months 0.6 (0.1 – 4.7) 0.6 0.6 (0.1 – 4.7) 0.6 I want social distancing to stop now 2.5 (0.3 – 25.7) 0.4 1.3 (0.1 – 22.3) 0.9 Emotional well-being 0.9 (0.8 – 1.0) <0.01 0.9 (0.8 – 1.0) 0.042 Flourishing was excluded from analysis due to overlap with emotional well-being.*Excluded from multivariable analysis due to 0 respondents in reference categories for respondents with no change in control IBSConclusionsOur study showed differences in well-being and compliance to social distancing between IBS and non-IBS respondents, and these factors influence the worsening in severity of IBS. Further research will focus on how occupational stress and dietary changes may influence IBS symptoms

The potential impact of previous exposure to SARS or MERS on control of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is believed to share similar characteristics with SARS in 2003 and Mediterranean East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2012. We hypothesized that countries with previous exposure to SARS and MERS were significantly more likely to have fewer cases and deaths from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We retrieved the incidence of COVID-19 per 100,000 population within 30 days since the first confirmed case was reported from the 2019 Novel COVID-19 data repository by the Johns Hopkins Centre for Systems Science and Engineering for 94 countries. The association between previous exposure to SARS and/or MERS and the 30-day COVID-19 incidence rate was examined by multivariable linear regression analysis, whilst controlling for potential confounders including the INFORM COVID-19 Risk Index, Testing Policies, Democracy Index, Scientific Citation Index, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Human Development Index (HDI) and the population density of each country. We found that countries with previous exposure to SARS and/or MERS epidemics were significantly more likely to have lower incidence of COVID-19 (ß coefficient - 225.6, 95% C.I. - 415.8,- 35.4, p = 0.021). However, countries being classified as having "full democracy" using Democracy Index had higher incidence of COVID-19 (reference: authoritarian regime; ß coefficient 425.0, 95% C.I. 98.0, 752.0, p = 0.011). This implies that previous exposure to global epidemics and Democracy Index for a country are associated its performance in response to COVID-19. We recommend future studies should evaluate the impact of various pandemic control strategies at individual, community, and policy levels on mitigation of the disease.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Haematologist's Perspective.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is affecting millions of patients worldwide. It is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which belongs to the family Coronaviridae, with 80% genomic similarities to SARS-CoV. Lymphopenia was commonly seen in infected patients and has a correlation to disease severity. Thrombocytopenia, coagulation abnormalities, and disseminated intravascular coagulation were observed in COVID-19 patients, especially those with critical illness and non-survivors. This pandemic has caused disruption in communities and hospital services, as well as straining blood product supply, affecting chemotherapy treatment and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation schedule. In this article, we review the haematological manifestations of the disease and its implication on the management of patients with haematological disorders.

Relating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers with incidence or mortality of COVID-19.

The present Perspective examined the latest evidence on the association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and the incidence/mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our critical appraisal from existing literature does not support discontinuation of ACEIs/ARBs in clinical practice as there is absence of solid evidence. However, we do recommend future research perspective in formulation and implementation of practice-changing guidelines.